As you all know, the Foundation has a mandate to design and develop the public chain. She should advertise this, and create the necessary infrastructure for a public chain, parallel to TB.

So a purely creative role. Unfortunately, the foundation missed those goals. Instead of taking care of Nem, most of the actors took care of themselves. So much so, that they themselves did not stop at obscuring miscreants, but even grumbled at the community and criticized this negativity.

The construct has to become slimmer. At the time it was possible, not the right steps were taken. It’s too late now. Many who have nothing to show, please go. I do not want to name names but anyone who is paid by the Foundation and has not achieved or could not contribute should please quit.

Otherwise, only one thing remains to be stated.

The death of the Foundation is not necessarily the deciding factor for Nem, or to important.

I’m sorry to inform you, but that is not correct. I know the confusion exists in a lot of minds and I understand why.
Neverteheless, more correct is probably:

The core devs design and develop the server software (NIS as we called it, now the codename catapult is often used for the new NIS in development)

Community members are running the public chain, so that’s everybody’s responsibility

The Foundation’s mandate is to introduce, educate and promote the technology. In that role the Foundation has helped to grant or fund the development of components (as f.e. the NanoWallet) and many other activities ,mainly marketing oriented.

So basically NEM is much, much more than only the Foundation. And it is never too late for anything.

Yes all MOUs on hold indefinitely until we have clarify for the rest of 2019.

garp:

The Foundation’s mandate is to introduce, educate and promote the technology. In that role the Foundation has helped to grant or fund the development of components (as f.e. the NanoWallet) and many other activities ,mainly marketing oriented.

That was how it started. Moving forward, we will move from being marketing-oriented to be revenue-driven and product-focused. We need to be sustainable. There is no point funding NEM Foundation any more we do not have anyone in the organisation driving the economic sustainability of NEM. That is why in the proposal there will be a Chief Revenue Officer role whose job is to bring in revenue to NEM through the commercialisation of our existing technology and Catapult.

garp:

The core devs design and develop the server software (NIS as we called it, now the codename catapult is often used for the new NIS in development)

Community members are running the public chain, so that’s everybody’s responsibility

On point @garp ! Your thoughts are always valued. NEM Foundation operates as a separate entity and is one of many ecosystem contributors to the NEM open-source project. Therefore the NEM Foundation is not NEM. The NEM open source project remains strong and thriving.